Delete server template

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral context: the first call is non-destructive (preview only) and requires a confirm_token for actual deletion. This goes beyond the annotations and provides a clear mental model.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the primary action and consequence. The second sentence explains the safe-call pattern. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description explains the return value of the first call (preview + confirm_token) and the behavior of subsequent calls. There is no output schema, so this is helpful. It could mention the second call's output, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a simple deletion tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 50% coverage (code and guild described). The description adds context by explaining the confirm_token and the two-step process, indirectly clarifying the dry_run and confirm_token parameters. It doesn't explicitly describe each parameter, but the added context aids understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('server template'), and notes a consequence ('its share link stops working'). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_server_template or sync_server_template.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Safe to call directly: the first call changes nothing and returns a preview plus a confirm_token; repeating the call with the token deletes it.' This explains the safe two-step process, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.